i ic nostgracluaie T'auarrt : i -oEremmes Assessec C' lew,ork h[arksheet &

I and tnrei-pi-ei lng stucte- '

^.2*-li*-^ I ,:'r{*'.+-7:tt ':':'- "i-* -;- ( / /

ase pass to 2"' YuIt'"' O1"l - : j . . : ' * - - ' )7

/--it:,"i..:.

7uu.:._-. -l

iiI

I

__l

3, St! 'ucl iure and Argument:

4. $tvle, Presentation and

fr'*"/tttt

r ' .> t . ' * - ' - / i /

Second l4arkerl Dr James S', nndfu /J

Second Marker's Com rysntsj!.Fs:g

1. Urrc ierstanCing of ToPic: <::,R <*-i'ri\> o-!<

I

2. Awareness and Application of Crit ical/Theoretical ideas:

3, Structure and Argument l

.,. . ;-.rrl.-r1rj.S.:\ , \ . t3

$u $. \ . r" t u ,s{-r ( ti! i-.rv, 9 [.c..ri,,uL.,.

f i - i ( l - -a ' l.-a'CI---..

-l j

ij'*<-r-i-:i

C"',..a !.r:r0,! ,4, Style, Presentat ion and Documentat ion:

t-,-----*'---.--

l , i : l i 'ec' ,ci l tr ternai ! '4ark ( lr i i ] : ' [^ l- ' is ' t ' ' ' 'a ' i - i l ts

L

VS r +qaL

Application of Polysystem Theory inAdapted Children's Literature Translation

Polysystem theory advanced by Even-Zohar, provides researchers with a target oriented)lr .IJ //.; ' ..'

method to look at translated literature as "a particular literary system" and its position within a o'f '1. ;,.12. ,..

national (or multi-national) literary polysysteml (1990:11) In "the Position of Translated Literatur6".' : u .

/ L t-''"'

within the Literary Polysystem",Even-Zohar focuses on sorting oJt the timing when translated .t4,.t: ",literature becomes central or peripheralwithin a given culture. The position of translated literatur" |

,, -,',/ 'may determine the role it plays within its target literary system, how a piece of work is translated '.,

and which works are translated. To see how this abstract framework could apply to real life

situation,I will use Chung-ling Shih's research, "Adaptation of Gulliver's Travels for Children in

Taiwan: a Perspective of the Polysystem Theory" to examine the usefulness of the theory./

Even-Zohar states that translated literature's position in a given national literary polysystem

is mobile. In the literary polysystem, which is dynamic Ydt, translated literature does not maintainL,.s: /

a peripheral position permanently. The assumption ff translated literature benq permanently in /' .

periphery q$!is more common in the past, derives from the fact that the.translated literary

system remains invisible most of the time, be it in the central or peripheral position. One would

wonder how a system remains unnoticed as a "particular system" when it takes central position. It is

because "in this sifuation no clear-cut distinction is maintained between o'original" and "translated"

writings".;(Even-Zohar 1990) According to Even-Zohar, three conditions of a certain literature

could give rise to this situation: {irst is its youngrress, second is its beingitperiphely or weakness,

and third is the existence of the internal "literary vacuum".

Children's literature in Taiwan before 1990 seems to correspond to ttre first condition

mentioned abovb for the situation fits into the description: "Since a young literature cannot

immediately create texts in all types known to its producers, it benefits from the experience of other

literatures, and translated literature becomes in this way one of its most important systepg;j'(Even-

Zohar 1990) To see how the change of children's literature's status influences translation and

adaptation strategies, Shih selects two versions olg$fgd Gulliver's Travels'translation, one

published in 1978 and another in 1990, to compare and analyze the differences.

The result of the analysis of her case study shows that the older version uses easier and more

colloquial discourse in order to enhance children's comprehension of the moral lessons conveyed in

the translated adaptation. The intention of teaching moral lessons can be seen from the deletion of

plots that do not contribute to the morality children should learn from the story and the adding of

elements that are originally not in the source text to emphasize acceptable values. The more recent

z. .1 ' ' l ' '

version differen*ie*€Js from the older version byretding more "faithfulry", which means not

adding and deleting plots and scenes as the translator likes and using more formal languages t-g$gt "'

the style of the language would be closer to the original text. Another reason for this strategy, which

includes increased density of four-character-idioms, is to perform the didactic function of a "good" '

children's literature, with which the young readers would possibly enrich their vocabulary. To ' ',. .

conclude, Shih relates the differences to the characteristics of peripheral and central translated t

literature described in Even-Zohar's polysystem theory. The translated text of the older version is . "

manipulated more freely so that it complies with the existing model in the target system which

placg.great emphasis on moral teaching for children. This behavior accords with the one that

belongs to the peripheral translated literature in Even-Zohar's polysystem theory. On the other

r i :hand, the more recent ygfs,ron shows a translated $1|lhat indicates more faithfulness to the originalt/

pourcgtext, which accords with Even-Zohar's description of a translated literature that has takenc'

central positionfs "modeled to a large extent upon an exterior literature". Hence Shih claims that .,.' ,

her case study shows translation and adaptation strategies influenced by the status of the literature

in accordance with that observed by Even-Zohar.

However, it seems that Shih does not distinguish "translated children's literature" from

"(original) children's literature" in this research. Since it is "translated children's literature" that1'

mov{ from a central status toward a peripheral status and vice versa for "(original) children's/ ,

literature", the act of setting up two separate models coul4be necessary. InZohar Shavit's

"Translation of Children's Literature as a Function of its Position in the Literary Polysystem", it is

implied that chi|{gn's literature could hardly be in the central position within the macro-literary

polysystem-4nd\"it behaves in many (...) ways similarly to the non-canonized adult system" (Even-I ,J ' .

Zohar t9l$l!s a result, "$S{:a

children's literature translation will always be confined by either

or both principles which are didactic-orientation and the consideration of comprehension and

reading abilities.'(S havit lgig) The constraints could be applied in both versions in Shih's case,.i..

study. The older version, which is in peripheral position, uses more comprehensible language to

ensure the acceptability of morality by young readers. The more recent version, which is in central

position, consists of more formal phrases so that not only could it be more faithful to the original

text, but also enhance children's language ability. This phenomenon presents a problem which is if

children's literature has indeed taken central status, should it be confined by the two principles? Or

in other words, should the constraints be charactenze as being only in secondary system? i '

Another point that polysystem theory lack is the ability to take social, economic and political

factors into consideration. In Shih's research, many assumptions have to be made to account for the

I

t ' , f

i ' tr i i :

I t . { t5 l , f ' '

t

i . rI

' j '

n, !I

. : , , ,

shifting status of children's literature in Taiwan. Exgept for the reasons proposed in the research,

there are still some other possibilities. Political factor can be see in "Taiwan Translated Foreign

children's literature in 1945-1992 Research Study" which shows the dramaticqfincrease of

translation since 1988, which is one year after democratization. The fact that traditionally Mandarin I , i'.

speakers' children were educated by reciting "si shu wu jing" (classical verses) regardless 9"19: ,-J t t ' :

complete incomprehensibility could also be one of the causes that contribute to the insignificance of i

children's literature. Polysystem theory is a demonstration ofthe mobile relationship among all

literatures. It is not perfect and efforts of improving polysystem theory has been made by many.

Andre Lefevere, who highlights the influence of patronage and refraction is one example.

(198212000) Hopefully this essay would inspire more exploration.

word count: 1085

REFERENCE

Cheng, Sieu-Mqi and lVen Chong Hong (1994) I94s-1992 +EigteE4EHEffitr JX.€;ffiIFF,,Ji 'ri ".* -.. a 'f(h I r' .. i-

+#sffififfifi tTaiw&i Translated Foreign children's literature in 1945-1992 Research Studyl,-l' /thttp:/lntur.lib.ntu.eclu.tw/handle/246246l1 19997 [last accessed 4 ' '

November 20091

ehu, Pei-lan (1990) ffiTtJIfrWie [Gulliver's Travels], Taipei: The Kwang-Fu Book Co. Ltd.

Even-Zohar, Itamar (1974) 'Israeli Hebrew Literature: A Historical Model', English version in

Even-Zohar, 1978:75-92 !

(1978) 'The Position of Translated Literature Within the Literary Polysystem', in Holmes,

James et al (eds) Literature and Tronslation,Lettven: Acco, ll7-127; reprinted 1990 in Poetics

Today l1(l): 45-51; reprinted in Polysystem Studies-

Huang, Nan (1978) ffirUIfrffiiE leulliver's Travels], Kaohsiung: The Da-ZhongBook Co. Ltd.

Lefevere, Andre (1982) 'Mother Courageos Cucumbers: Text, System and Refraction in a Theory of

Literature', Modern Language Studies D@):3-20; reprinted in Lawrence Venuti (ed.) (2000) The

Translation Studies Reader, London & New York: Routledge, 233-249.

Shavit, Zohar (1979)'The Self Image of Children's Literature' Paper presented at the International

Conference on the Child and the Book,Istanbul University.

(1981) 'Translation of Children's Literature as a Function of its Position in the Literary

Polysystem' , Poetics today 2(4): l7l-179.

Shih, Chung-ling (2003) 'Adaptation of Gulliver ' s Travels for Children in Taiwan: A Perspective

of the Polysystem Theory', Tamkang Studies of Foreign Languages and Literatures (11): 137-163.

tt